[isabelle] question about "fun"
I was trying to produce a "fun" definition that given a list produces
a couple of lists (the following definition of "gener" is just a
simplified version where my question already arises).
fun gener :: "'a list => (nat list * 'a list)"
gener_Cons: "gener (a # b # l) =
(if a = b then (0 # fst (gener (b # l)), snd (gener (b # l)))
else (fst (gener l), snd (gener l)))"
|gener_Nil: "gener a = (, a)"
Somehow, the induction rule associated to the previous definition:
has the following aspect:
\<And> a b l. [| a = b ==> ?P (b # l); a = b ==> ?P (b # l); a
\<noteq> b ==> ?P l; a \<noteq> b ==> ?P l |] ==> ?P (a # b # l);
?P ; \<And>v. ?P [v] |]
==> ?P ?a0.0
where both cases "a = b" and "a \<noteq> b" appear twice, which does
not pose any limitation but may result a bit annoying when trying to
May somebody know a way to avoid this behaviour?
Thanks in advance,
Jesús María Aransay Azofra
Universidad de La Rioja
Dpto. de Matemáticas y Computación
tlf.: (+34) 941299438 fax: (+34) 941299460
mail: jesus-maria.aransay at unirioja.es ; web: http://www.unirioja.es/cu/jearansa
Edificio Luis Vives, c/ Luis de Ulloa s/n, 26004 Logroño, España
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail (Mailman edition) and